Isn`t saturation/juicing photo`s FRAUD ?

SUPERCARCOINS · August 12, 2006 1:28PM

You see so many coins for sale with pix that are alot more colorful then the coins in hand -

.....shouldn`t this be considered criminal ?

SilverEagles92 · August 12, 2006 1:32PM

Not really. Just buyer beware.

hootchiegirl · August 12, 2006 1:37PM

fraud is very "ambivolous" it's hard to prove and hard to contend. If ya knows yer coins ya knows yer fraud

Coinosaurus · August 12, 2006 1:42PM

Given that a photograph can't perfectly capture a coin anyway, it isn't necessarily fraud to doctor the photo. Now, if one doctors the photo with intent to hide defects, that is another thing altogether. But how do you prove intent?

dizzyfoxx · August 12, 2006 1:46PM

Another reason, among many, why a coin MUST be viewed in-hand prior to committing to it. JMHO.

TwoSides2aCoin · August 12, 2006 2:00PM

I think using saturation or even adding magenta, subracting cyan, etc, etc... is a matter of one's attempt to adust the coin, not in it's TRUE light, but in it's "BEST" light.

You can paint a turd, but it's still a turd. I think the secret to scoring via pictures, is to look past COLOR and LIGHT. Sometimes, questions to the seller are invaluable tools in finding the TRUTH about the coin.

If it's a slabbed coin with pictures, there ought to be grade points in the tenth scale. i.e, MS65.2 or MS65.8, as there is a big difference. ( a hint to the bosses how the hundred point scale works)

rsdoug81 · August 12, 2006 2:03PM

<< You can paint a turd, but it's still a turd. >>

...sage advice

Boom · August 12, 2006 2:35PM

There is editing to attain the "correct" look and then there is overdoing it and THAT would be considered fraudulant.

Making a coin look nothing like it actually does is overdoing it.

I don't have to "Do" anything with a clear bulb and the correct WB but OTT lamps are different and I find that my background paper doesn't come out the right color even with the correct settings (according to mgoodm3) therefore I have to edit and manually adjust. (Still practicing)

Until I learn to use it correctly I will refrain from using it for pix of coins that I have for sale (besides I prefer the natural look of the clear bulb).

Another thing is Photoshop. I've tried it and must say that for me, personally, it's too much and I don't care for the results which again would imply that I need to keep working at it.

I don't want any buyer or potential buyer, to see anything more or less in my pix than what he or she is actually going to see in person.

relayer · August 12, 2006 3:26PM

Talk about painting a turd

1894-S MS64 DMPL for $325

Boom · August 12, 2006 3:28PM

<< Talk about painting a turd >>

Oh my Gawd. Now THAT's what I am talkin' about. THAT is definitely out there.

Bruceswar · August 12, 2006 3:33PM

wowsers... gross...

Craton · August 12, 2006 3:41PM

<< Talk about painting a turd

1894-S MS64 DMPL for $325

>>

That bozo hasn't been busted yet? It's pretty disapointing to know that ebay has recieved complaints about his photoshopping business and they continue to let him rob folks.

Myqqy · August 12, 2006 3:52PM

Talk about painting a turd

Julio · August 12, 2006 3:55PM

Using any and all technology to give an accurate depiction of a coin is the correct thing to do. This helps not only the buyer but the seller also.
Photoshop is IMO the best program on the market and in the right hands can be an asset to the hobby. In the wrong hands it can deceive even an expert.
Buy high dollars coins from those with liberal return policies and people you trust.
As said earlier if possible look at that special coin in person. jws

stman · August 12, 2006 4:00PM

Depends who is doing it. Y'all know the rest.

Frankcoins · August 12, 2006 4:40PM

90% of computer users have never run the gamma adjust program for their
monitors, nor do they have the proper monior drivers and color management profiles
installed...they are just using Windows defaults. LCD montitors have a much
narrower range of color reproduction, and less contrast range, than CRT monitors.
Therefore no single image can look correct in all these situations.

Julio · August 12, 2006 4:44PM

90% of computer users have never run the gamma adjust program for their
monitors, nor do they have the proper monior drivers and color management profiles
installed...they are just using Windows defaults. LCD montitors have a much
narrower range of color reproduction, and less contrast range, than CRT monitors.
Therefore no single image can look correct in all these situations.

I concur completely. jws

elwood · August 12, 2006 10:26PM

One thing I know is that pictures of food used for advertisement rarely look like the thing you actually end up with on your plate.

ER · August 12, 2006 10:32PM

<< One thing I know is that pictures of food used for advertisement rarely look like the thing you actually end up with on your plate. >>

Yeah, but you're not buying that exact thing on the ad.

With coins, unless otherwise noted, the gentlemen assumption is, the coin being put up for sale/auction is the exact coin you will receive.

ER · August 12, 2006 10:32PM

<< Depends who is doing it. Y'all know the rest.

>>

BAJJERFAN · August 12, 2006 10:37PM

90% of computer users have never run the gamma adjust program for their
monitors, nor do they have the proper monior drivers and color management profiles
installed...they are just using Windows defaults. LCD montitors have a much
narrower range of color reproduction, and less contrast range, than CRT monitors.
Therefore no single image can look correct in all these situations.

...........................

So where does one find this stuff then?

ER · August 12, 2006 10:44PM

<< ........Therefore no single image can look correct in all these situations........ >>

Damn, Bajjerfan, the coin in your sig is juiced!

TorinoCobra71 · August 12, 2006 11:00PM

Not really......just UNETHICAL.......But that is just how some sellers are.

TorinoCobra71

TorinoCobra71 · August 12, 2006 11:06PM

<< Talk about painting a turd

1894-S MS64 DMPL for $325

>>

That is why educating oneself to learn about stuff like this is paramount. I hate seeing a POWER SELLER screw over the little guy like this. But then again this seller has been complained about here before. Surprised that Ebay has not sanctioned them yet.

TorinoCobra71

SUPERCARCOINS · August 13, 2006 12:01AM

.....well then , UNETHICAL....... at the very least .

I specificly can`t stand the people that enhance the colors , so they look deeper and more pronounced.

I think that ALOT of sellers do this , and yes, all monitors are diffrent -

but to juice up a pix so it looks more colorful then it really is ; thats commiting a fraud

roadrunner · August 13, 2006 12:17AM

If your name is Bondman you are a juicer that even Jack La Lanne or Jay "the juice man" Kordish would be proud of.

If it's a slabbed coin with pictures, there ought to be grade points in the tenth scale. i.e, MS65.2 or MS65.8, as there is a big difference. ( a hint to the bosses how the hundred point scale works)

Imagine the profits PCGS & NGC could rack up once people start resubmitting coins to get a 0.2 or 0.3 upgrade! On many coins this would be significant. And with the inaccuracies of the grading, most everything that can't be bumped up a full grade would eventually
end up at the upper half of the grade range. That MS65.2 bust half that formerly brought $5200, now brings $6500 as a MS65.5.
Or even $5800 as a MS65.4. For $25 how can you go wrong?
Ka-Ching.

roadrunner

ziggy29 · August 13, 2006 12:28AM

Would that be Fraud or Fraud (TM)?

Seriously, though, using software to manipulate images to sell is a little touchy. Some would say you never should and that you should shoot until you get it right, and that's fine (albeit tedious). But in any event, there's a big difference between an honest attempt to make the image look as much like the real coin as possible and juicing the colors or hiding problems.

ER · August 13, 2006 12:32AM

Which one you like?

RichieURich · August 13, 2006 5:17AM

Relayer, as soon as I saw the picture of that coin I knew who the seller would be. That shows how much he juices his photos.

lsica · August 13, 2006 8:41AM

<< Which one you like? >>

In the best light you have, angled in the way it looks best, which one does it look like in hand? Nos 3 and 4 are obviously disqualified ("beware the blue slab"). And the supposition is that #1 is the "unjuiced" photo, with the others with increasing amount of saturation. But the unadjusted photo isn't neccesarily the one that looks like the actual piece.

Whizzard · August 13, 2006 9:25AM

<< 

<< Talk about painting a turd

1894-S MS64 DMPL for $325

>>

That bozo hasn't been busted yet? It's pretty disapointing to know that ebay has recieved complaints about his photoshopping business and they continue to let him rob folks.

>>

I didn't know they made Morgan Dollars out of pewter!

lsica · August 13, 2006 9:47AM

<< I didn't know they made Morgan Dollars out of pewter! >>

Or auto body putty

Smitty79 · August 13, 2006 9:51AM

<< 

<< 

<< Talk about painting a turd

1894-S MS64 DMPL for $325

>>

That bozo hasn't been busted yet? It's pretty disapointing to know that ebay has recieved complaints about his photoshopping business and they continue to let him rob folks.

>>

I didn't know they made Morgan Dollars out of pewter! >>

He just laid down the primer coat so smoeone can latter add the pretty colors.

Boom · August 13, 2006 10:17AM

I have NO IDEA what frankscoins and Julio are talking about. Can someone explain what is meant by this?

It's completely over my head.

BAJJERFAN · August 13, 2006 10:44AM

Coin image as seller listed it on eBay!!

Coin as it looks in hand. The second image is much closer to the true look than is the first image. In fact I had my sunglasses handy when I opened the package that it came in; just in case.

BAJJERFAN · August 13, 2006 10:53AM

eBay image.

coin in hand image.

Sunnywood · August 13, 2006 10:59AM

For those of you who are interested, you might have a look a this thread over on the TCCS Boards (Toned Coin Collectors Society). In addition, there are many other threads there in both the "Rainbow Room" and "Toned Coin" forums that deal with the subject of images, manipulation, differences between imaging techniques, and the monitor factor. This has been a hot topic over there. No image is 100% accurate. Some post-imaging manipulation to improve the accuracy of the digital representation is often necessary, to compensate for the deficiencies in imaging. (Many scanners and cameras offer things such as white balance adjustment and contrast enhancement built right in, so that is no different from doing it afterwards.) But there can be real differences of opinion on what is accurate, and what is an OVER-representation of the coin. I do object when images that IMHO are prettier and more colorful than the coins themselves are used to sell coins, but others may look at those same images and say they are accurate. And that may also be strongly affected by the type of monitor being used by each viewer. Bottom line in any case, never buy a coin based solely on the image - you MUST see it in hand.

Thread with various images of the same banded rainbow Morgan toner

Best,
Sunnywood

stman · August 13, 2006 11:10AM

I guess I'm a bit different..... some of the images I see I WOULDN't want or expect the coin in person to look like the image.
Why, because many images don't look real to life (and yes I know what coins look like in person

) and if they looked like the tweaked out images I would be very afraid. Also, I don't want to see images with the 3degree or 1degree tilt that I will hardly ever see in person. Unless of course I go buy every light on the market, get a stiff neck trying to find the colors etc. I believe the new wave description is "Visually optimized " or something to that effect. This term I learned right here on this board. Haha

Fairlaneman · August 13, 2006 11:57AM

What did you start this thread ? Did you purchase a coin on ebay that was really colorful in the auction and then it was rather blah when you received it ? If so why did you keep it or did you keep it ?

If there are some other sellers that constantly abuse photo color lets hear about them. These threads always go back to the same couple of people that abuse coin color with their juicing.

Ken

ANACONDA · August 13, 2006 12:16PM

.....shouldn`t this be considered criminal ?

Maybe not. Images carry with them enough information that you can determine whether they are accurate representations of coins just by simply looking at the image.

But, not everyone is experienced enough to be able to look at an image so as to determine whether or not it accurately portrays the coin.

One could argue that if the image simply did not properly portray the coin then fraud may have occurred. Intent to defraud would need to be proved.

If the seller says something like "my images are generally poor indicators of a coin's actual condition" then the buyer may have been warned appropriately not to rely on the seller's images.

Certainly if the seller gives a return privilege there would be no fraud.

Having said all that, if you're buying from a seller who doesn't give a return privilege you may be too stupid to know you have been defrauded.

SUPERCARCOINS · September 2, 2006 12:47PM

<< What did you start this thread ? Did you purchase a coin on ebay that was really colorful in the auction and then it was rather blah when you received it ? If so why did you keep it or did you keep it ?

If there are some other sellers that constantly abuse photo color lets hear about them. These threads always go back to the same couple of people that abuse coin color with their juicing.

Ken >>

I started this thread because i am sick of seeing so many juiced pix on ebay and elseware .

I seldom if ever buy a coin without a return priv. ,

but it so dissapointing to be dreamming about some fantasticly toned coin you won ,

thinking how cool it will be to add such a monster rainbow to your collection..........

then you open the package and have to ship the p.o.s back.

it sucks after doing it a couple of hundred times

Isn`t saturation/juicing photo`s FRAUD ?

Comments

Leave a Comment